Check out PHB2 and see how you feel about retraining the class feature. If you have down time in the campaign, then you can take the time to retrain your favored enemies. So you can say have favored enemy (animals) and after the isle of dread you can switch it over to favored enemy (evil outsiders). Just a thought, but like I said if you have the gold and the time, then I see no problem...
Saying an ability is USELESS is OK in my opinion. Telling them what would be USEFUL is a little bit different, but still not bad. This is an adventure path and a character can be level 20 before the end, so they need to expect something more difficult than goblins. Besides if they read the covers of Dungeon (whichever issue you happen to be holding) they will likely see something to the effect of Pirates, Demons, Zombie Pirates, and Dinosaurs (and that T-rex on the cover is a good giveaway. :) I will probably discourage my cleric from beefing up her turning undead too.
i haven't seen anyone analyze the frequency of various enemies on STAP just yet. from reading through so far, i think:
1st favored enemy: humans -lotus dragons, stiltwalkers, any pirates, maybe a meravanchi or two.
2nd favored enemy: animals -all over the isle of dread. really i suppose it is up to the player to chose, both human and animal are valid from the first adventure onward.
3rd favored enemy: evil outsiders -I dont remember a really dangerous outsider until the bat god or vanthus. although i think vanthus might have been a native outsider... anyway i don't think it would be worth it until higher levels, at least not until we see how the rest of the AP goes.
Actually, it was a mephit on the Sea Wyvern, not an imp. Not that it makes much difference really.
Olangru and his 3 mates constitute the second evil/chaotic outsider threat. The first was the Varrangoin in Tamoachan.
Undead are a minority, but not a complete absence. Fey are a real absence, and oozes have but a cameo so far. Constructs have had a few walk-ins, as have aberrations.
For pure "frequency", I'd say human, followed by animal, followed by chaotic outsider (then evil, if it matters), followed by undead, then aberrations, then vermin, then magical beasts, then constructs.
For "utility" I'd pick animal, then chaotic outsider, then aberration. Animals are most common, but when the demons and aberrations come out, every little bit of edge seems so much more valuable, because of how dangerous those encounters are. The fully buffed spirit naga in the Shrine of Demogorgon nearly killed my party on her own.
Check out PHB2 and see how you feel about retraining the class feature.
Actually that becomes really useful for rangers. You might want to take Favoured Enemy (outsiders) at first level so you can dump the bonus +2 into it every time you level, making it +4 at 5th etc. But then you aren't that likely to meet outsiders at low levels. So now you pick humans at 1st level then when you are about to level up to 10th or 15th you retrain your 1st level favoured enemy to outsiders and it gets the maximum bonus.
Although having checked Table 8-2 you can only retrain combat style and animal companion choices. Shame it would have been a nice idea.
|
Check out PHB2 and see how you feel about retraining the class feature.Actually that becomes really useful for rangers. You might want to take Favoured Enemy (outsiders) at first level so you can dump the bonus +2 into it every time you level, making it +4 at 5th etc. But then you aren't that likely to meet outsiders at low levels. So now you pick humans at 1st level then when you are about to level up to 10th or 15th you retrain your 1st level favoured enemy to outsiders and it gets the maximum bonus.
Although having checked Table 8-2 you can only retrain combat style and animal companion choices. Shame it would have been a nice idea.
Meh. If you're the DM, I say add it to the list--treating each favoured enemy selection as a separate class feature. It seems more like an oversight that an intentional decision to leave it off the list (otherwise, it begs the question of "why?").
For a typical campaign, taking humans as a favored enemy is almost always the best choice for frequency of use. Considering how difficult the fight against the rhagodessa on the Blue Nixie can be, taking vermin might provide the party with a needed edge. Animals would provide much more utility, though, especially on arrival to the IoD, so allowing the ranger to retrain from vermin to animals should be OK. Aberrations and outsiders have been fairly thin, so far, but will become more common in the future installments. The Lightless Depths will showcase aberrations, from its description of a city divided by aboleths and kopru.
Creative Director
|
Aberrations and outsiders have been fairly thin, so far, but will become more common in the future installments. The Lightless Depths will showcase aberrations, from its description of a city divided by aboleths and kopru.
SPOILERS TO FOLLOW:
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
,
,
.
Outsiders are going to become more common as the path gets into the higher level scene, with them being the MOST common foes in the last four adventures, I suspect.
As for aberrations, they'll remain a fairly middle-of-the-road frequency. "The Lightless Depths" does indeed take place in a ruined aboleth ciy, but there aren't actually many aboleths encountered in the adventure. There ARE a fair amount of aberrations though.
There is also the option of taking a favored environment instead of a favored enemy. Favored environments are presented on page 65 - 66 of the Unearthed Arcana supplement. Basically you choose from a list of environments such as aquatic or warm forest. It works exactly the same way as favored enemy does (in terms of how it is determined) but the bonuses are on the PCs Hide, Listen, Move Silently, Spot, and Survival checks and work when the PCs are in the favored environment. In my campaign I use both versions and my PC rangers can freely choose between them.
It should be noted that not all of these are necessarily intended to be fought/killed, but...
SPOILER!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
There is no Honor:
Pure numbers appearing:
9.4% Aberration, 1.6% Animal, 1.6% Construct, 1.6% Dragon, 51.6% Human, 1.6% Magical Beast, 17.2% Undead, 15.6% Vermin
Weighted by CR:
7.5% Aberration, 2.5% Animal, 2.5% Construct, 3.75% Dragon, 43.75% Human, 2.5% Magical Beast, 17.5% Undead, 12.5% Vermin
The Bullywug Gambit:
Pure numbers appearing:
1.5% Aberration, 11.76% Animal, 1.5% Humanoid, 23.5% Humanoid(aquatic), 1.5%Humanoid(gnome), 53%Human, 3% Humanoid(orc), 3% Magical Beast, 1.5% Plant
Weighted by CR:
2% Aberration, 7.5% Animal, 2.7% Humanoid, 19.7% Humanoid(aquatic), .7%Humanoid(gnome), 55.1%Human, 7.5% Humanoid(orc), 2.7% Magical Beast, 2% Plant
The Sea Wyvern's Wake:
Pure numbers appearing: (Caveat - the # of vine horrors was arbitrarily chosen as 24... it could be less, or a LOT more)
4.3% Aberration, 2.2% Animal, 23.9% Human, 6.5% Magical Beast, 2.2% Ooze, 2.2% Outsider(chaotic), 2.2% Outsider(water), 56.5% Plant
Weighted by CR:
6.3% Aberration, 3.4% Animal, 9.5% Human, 9.7% Magical Beast, 3.4% Ooze, 4.6% Outsider(chaotic), 1.7% Outsider(water), 61.3% Plant
I have a player that chose "human" as his first favored enemy, and it's been a pretty good strategic choice (but as DM, I find it a royal pain! Seems like choosing 'human' should be restricted to evil characters only, no?).
But he's planning to take "aberations" next, and I have a problem with this too: if you pick "humanoid" you must pick a sub-type, to be more specific (i.e., human, elf, orc, dwarf, etc.).
But if you pick "aberation" you get them all!
Now, it seems to me that elfs, humans, dwarfs, etc. are all pretty much the same in terms of anatomy, physiology, etc - so I can actually see lumping all of them together in one category, rather than splitting them up.
But aberrations are all totally different. How can someone traned in fighting, say, a beholder, have any benefit to fighting an aboleth? Totally different anatomy, physiology, etc.
It seems like you should have to pick a specific aberation and just get that one. Ditto for outsiders.
Anyone here agree/disagree?
But he's planning to take "aberations" next, and I have a problem with this too: if you pick "humanoid" you must pick a sub-type, to be more specific (i.e., human, elf, orc, dwarf, etc.).
But if you pick "aberation" you get them all!
. . . aberrations are all totally different. How can someone traned in fighting, say, a beholder, have any benefit to fighting an aboleth? Totally different anatomy, physiology, etc.
It seems like you should have to pick a specific aberation and just get that one. Ditto for outsiders.Anyone here agree/disagree?
Not entirely. Part of why a ranger gets a favored enemy is because he has a degree of animus toward the given creature. In that regard, I can see a ranger that has tangled with beholders and illithids and the like hating anything that is an aberration.
Sure, part of it is learning how to fight said monster, but part of the drive to learn about that monster is because the ranger hates the given monster type, and perhaps the hatred against aberrations is enough to drive them to learn about more "types" of monsters than it would for humanoids.
DMR,
What you say about abberations makes sense, but I think the rule is there for game balance and not realism. In a typical campaign, there will be many many humanoid enemies. Lots of humans, and then all the evil humanoids: goblins, orcs, kobolds, etc... It would be overpowered to let a ranger get all these as favored enemies with just one pick. Same thing for outsiders--there's just a bunch of them.
Abberations, not so much. Sure, some of the iconic and scariest D&D monsters are abberations: mind flayers and beholders mainly. But they're not encountered with anywhere near the frequency of humanoids, in a typical campaign.
I would say a DM could very well have a house rule for a specific campaign that makes a ranger narrow down his choices. If your entire campaign is about an invasion of abberrations from the Far Realms and they are 75% of the monsters the PCs will face, then abberations might become an overpowered choice for the ranger. But in a typical campaign, they're not.
I have a player that chose "human" as his first favored enemy, and it's been a pretty good strategic choice (but as DM, I find it a royal pain! Seems like choosing 'human' should be restricted to evil characters only, no?).
I don't think a ranger should have to be evil to take his own race/sub-race, as a favored enemy. A bounty hunter or lawman for instance, might be good or neutral but still know the habits of, and how to combat his chosen foes. It makes sense that they could study and understand their own race just as well or better by being a part of it too.
I thought this was one of the good changes to the 3.5 ranger.
|
Also, there is certainly nothing to prevent a DM from adding in a few side quests, or even just a few extra semi-random encounters, to allow the ranger to make use of their favored enemy, if it turns out they have chosen one that's comparatively "useless" in terms of actual encounters in savage tide.
You may have to add some quests anyway to keep the XP on track if, like me, you have a large party or for a number of other reasons. I have some fun ones planned, and a few more that will probably present themselves as the AP continues on.
I was wondering about choosing "savage" creatures for favored enemies as well...
I don't have the mag in front of me, but did the savage template alter their type? or does it work the same way as lycanthropes do now, where the base creature maintains their original type as far as the favored enemy is concerned...?
|
So I have finally gone through all the adventures and determined the best choices and when they should be taken.
1.Humanoid (human): there is a ton of humans during the begining of the campaign making this a great first choice!
2.Aberration: There is generally alot of aberrations during the campaign with the most culminating during the "Lightless Depths" adventure.I would add my +2 bonus to aberration for a total of +4.
or
2.Outsider (Evil): If your going for the Totemic Demonslayer PrC from Dragon #354 I would take this now for min/max purposes.I would add my +2 bonus to outsiders(evil)for a total of +4.
3.Outsider (chaos/evil):Now you want to take either choatic or evil outsiders because there going to be in evry adventure in great numbers from here on out (with the strange exception of "Lightless Depths" which has none).I would go with evil only because theres a few mjore bad guys with this subtype than chaos.I would add my +2 bonus to outsiders(evil)for a total of +4.
4.Undead: At this point in the campaign you will come into some serious undead action in every adventure.I would add my +2 bonus to outsiders(evil)for a total of +6.
5.Magical Beasts: At this point getting a new fav. enemy seems kinda silly but at least you can add that +2 bonus to outsiders(evil)(for a total of +8). All the major types of creatures that you will encountered have been covered with one of the above choices,and it is the only other major creature type to be fought.
So at 20th level it should look like this:
1.Humanoid (human)+2
2.Aberration: +4
3.Outsider (evil):+8
4.Undead:+2
5.Magical Beasts:+2
Im not sure if its better to choose outsiders(evil) first and suck up the fact that it will be useless for the first three adventures to get that extra +4 to damage and skills. Any insight on this would be helpful.
|
|
Im not sure if its better to choose outsiders(evil) first and suck up the fact that it will be useless for the first three adventures to get that extra +4 to damage and skills. Any insight on this would be helpful.Couldn't you choose outsiders(evil) 2nd (i.e. at 5th level) for the same effect (which I believe is just +2 over what you have)?
Ya, As I look at my chart again it would probably work out better that way.So the revised list at 20th level it should look like this:
1.Humanoid (human)+2 (Taken at first level)
2.Outsider (evil):+10 (Taken somewhere between Bullywug Gambit & SWW)
3.Aberration: +2 (taken during Tides of Dread)
4.Undead:+2 (Taken between CoBI and Serpents of S.)
5.Magical Beasts:+2 (Taken between EomE and PoD)
By doing it this way should allow you to get the most out of all the choices.
looking at it from a GM's point of view, I would sincerely recommend "Aberrations" and "Outsiders (evil)" as the main "favoured enemies".
As for "animals" and or "beasts" - the boni confered are less useful for these, meaning, except for some very rarified instances, players are not going to face animals and beasts, against which these boni are at "make or break" levels.
This is definitely a different case for Aberrations (throughout much of "Lightless Depths", parts of "CobI" and later in Scuttlecove ) which will see valuable use against minions and BBEGs themselves. I may add though, that I did deliberatly add aberrations as flavour or replacement monsters throughout the campaign.
As for Evil Outsiders, this is basically self-explaining in an AP which features Demogorgon as the final monstrosity, and it will see much (valuable) use beforehand.
I have always limited "humanoid (XYZ )" choice to those cultures at war with each other with high intensity or for generations, were a deliberate culture of hatred has sprung up against each other. Basically where the instinct at once and always is "to rid the world from this ba$/%%(/d !". Which usually does not mean humans in a non-monstrous camapaign. Hence, the sole reasonable application of "favoured enemy - humanoid (XYZ)" was a no-go hereabouts from the onset.
As the dark-horse of the bunch, I would add "dragons", who, while basically rare throughout the AP, the boni will have massive use in the few fights that will occur (basically Emraag and the Linnorm ...plus anything one might add.)
Undead aren't bad either--the ranger in the party's first favoured enemy is undead in fact, and can you blame her given the very first adventure?
Also guys you can always give hints through lore and stuff like that about what you might suggest.